T IPS FOR A S UCCESSFUL NCATE R EVIEW Matthew Cummiskey, Ph.D. Central CT State Univ., New Britain Materials available via website.

TIPS FOR A SUCCESSFUL NCATE REVIEW

Matthew Cummiskey, Ph.D.

Central CT State Univ., New Britain

Materials available via website

MY STORY

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

1. Current NASPE/NCATE Beginning Teacher Standards

2. Review process – reviewers3. Review process – program4. Developing the program report5. New NASPE/NCATE standard6. Questions

INITIAL (BEGINNING TEACHER) STANDARDS FOR PETE

REPORT DEVELOPMENT- PROGRAM

Program Report Cover sheet Section I - Context Section II - List of assessments Section III - Relationship of assessments to standards Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards Section V – Use of Assessments Results to Improve

Candidate and Program Performance Section VI – For Revised Reports Only

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section I-Context Tips:

Provide information but don’t inundate OK to “recycle” materials from across institution

Mission statements, program of study Field experiences are valuable! (strengths) Avoid referring reviewers to external websites

Not permitted

REPORT DEVELOPMENT

- PROGRAM

Section II-List of AssessmentsTips

You have 8 possible assessments, use all of them (7,8 – optional)

Programs are responsible for the quality of materials created by the unit Communicate with

the unit to resolve concerns

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section III - Relationship of Assessment to StandardsTips:

Only “check” assessments that are clearly aligned with the standards. Avoid a “Let’s see what sticks” approach

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards The meat and potatoes section of the report! Include 6-8 assessments that provide evidence for TCs

acquiring the desired competencies A1 – Licensure exam (typically, 80%) A2 – Content knowledge A3 – Candidate ability to plan instruction A4 – Assessment of internship, fieldwork, or clinical experience A5 – Effects on student learning A6 – Additional Assessment A7 – 8 – Optional Assessments

A3-6 should be performance- based assessments

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsThe narrative for each assessment must include:

1. Description of the assessment and its use in the program

2. Alignment to NASPE Standards3. Brief analysis of data findings4. Interpretation of how the data provides evidence of

meeting the standards5. Assessment documentation

Assessment instrument itself Scoring guide/rubric Date derived from assessment

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsTips:

Rubrics are critical! In my experience, rubrics are the #1 “fatal flaw” (Lund, 2006) A poor rubric will negate the rest of an otherwise well-planned

assessment

Generally see 3 types of rubrics:

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards1) No differentiation between levels of

performance(checklist format)

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards2) Minimal differentiation between levels of

performance; use of qualifier words

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards3) Detailed description that describes

performance at each rubric level; rich description (also known as qualitative or holistic rubrics)

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsCreating Assessments – Best to create broad

assessments that can provide evidence for meeting several standards/outcomes Teaching portfolio of collected works (online?),

student teaching evaluation, curriculum plan, cycle of instruction assignment, generic skill evaluation rubric, case studies, individual child project, field experience capstone (pre-student teaching) TCs cannot just collect material into a portfolio and

call it an assessment. They must act upon the material.

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsAssessment 1 – Typically state licensure

test Endeavor to provide generalized information

regarding to content of the test (motor learning, exercise science, history of PE, issues, fitness, tactics, etc) If possible, include source documents from the body

that administers the test (State Ed usually) Assessment 1 cannot provide evidence for

meeting performance-based standards (#’s 3-6) Communication, behavior management, student

assessment, etc

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsAssessment 5 – Effect on student learning

Tips: Provide evidence of TCs ability to influence

student learning in a school setting. May include assignments both given to AND completed by students.

REVIEW PROCESS- PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsOutcomes for each standard

Endeavor to provide evidence for all of the outcomes identified with each standard. Programs are not currently required to meet all outcomes. Standards are holistically

assessed via a preponderance of evidence and professional judgment. Varies depending on the number of outcomes Less objective than desired

Rigor Lack of discrimination – If every student (100%) passes an assessment for past three

years, does it sufficiently challenge TCs and demonstrate achievement of meaningful & challenging skills and behaviors?

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting StandardsPolicy on the Use of Course Grades

Are acceptable but must follow several specific documentation guidelines See: http://www.ncate.org/institutions/

GuidelinesGrades.asp?ch=90 Grades can be used for assessment #1 (if there

is no state licensure test), assessment #2, or one of the optional assessments (#’s 7 or 8)

REPORT DEVELOPMENT

- PROGRAM

Section IV – Evidence for Meeting Standards CCSU

Assessments

1 Praxis II[Licensure assessment, or other content-based assessment]

2 Physical Education Grade Point Average[Assessment of content knowledge in physical education]

3 Mid-Point Planning Assessment[Assessment of candidate ability to plan instruction]

4 Student Teaching Evaluations[Assessment of internship or clinical experiences]

5 Student Teaching Exit Portfolio[Assessment of candidate effect on student learning]

6 Skills Competency RubricAdditional assessment that addresses AAHPERD/NASPE standards (required) ]

7 Professional Dispositions RubricAdditional assessment that addresses AAHPERD/NASPE standards (optional) ]

8 Portfolio and Development Task Additional assessment that addresses AAHPERD/NASPE standards (optional) ]

REPORT DEVELOPMENT- PROGRAM

Section V – Use of Assessments Results to Improve Candidate and Program PerformanceTips:

The focus of section V is linking data from assessment results to program or student improvement. Don’t just say how the program has improved

What if you have collected data that can be used to improve program or student performance but have not acted on it? 1) OK – Explain your conclusions and state that the

program is currently collaborating to formulate new policy

2) Best – Explain your conclusions and how you plan to improve the program. Include documentation if it exists. Future planned improvements are 80% reality

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Section VI – Revised Reports If submitting a rejoinder for a met with conditions

report, the reviewers are instructed to ONLY examine information related to the conditions and not the entire report This eliminates “double jeopardy”

REPORT DEVELOPMENT - PROGRAM

Helpful resources from NCATE Guidelines for preparing the program report NCATE reviewer guidelines Checklist for evaluating assessments Checklist for program report Guidelines for revised reports Guidelines on the use of course grades

REVIEW PROCESS- REVIEWERS

3 reviewers Undergone training and online web seminars Start as assistant reviewer and promoted to lead

Expectations Confidentiality Avoid conflict of interest Keep digging (even if evidence is in wrong section) Make ALL decisions based on evidence presented

Be objective; avoid personal judgments Refrain from prescriptive language

Program should endeavor to…

REVIEW PROCESS- REVIEWERS

Online review process1. Access files online and create working deadline2. Develop program report

Continually compare assessments to standards Read entire report once before entering evaluative mode Evaluate assessments via worksheet

3. Post individual report and review others’

REVIEW PROCESS- REVIEWERS

Online review process4. Conference Call

Collaboratively review evidence for each standard Reach consensus final judgments for each standard

(8/10 on last report) and overall result

5. Lead reviewer creates and posts final report6. Assistant reviewers review final report, sign off7. NCATE auditors examine final report

REVIEW PROCESS- REVIEWERS

Recognition Decisions Nationally recognized

Contingent upon unit accreditation May include some Areas for Improvement (AFI)

Nationally recognized with conditions Must resubmit within 18 months to remove conditions Program will have two opportunities within 18 months to

resubmit Not nationally recognized

Program will have two opportunities to resubmit within 12-14 months to attain “nationally recognized” or “nationally recognized with conditions”

REVIEW PROCESS- REVIEWERS

NEW NASPE/NCATE STANDARDS

A look under the hood 2008 National Initial

Physical Education Teacher Education Standards (NASPE/NCATE) Unofficially the 6th edition

(1st in 1985). Programs must meet all

outcomes under each standard. Not holistically judged

REFERENCES Butler, J. (2006). An introduction to NCATE and

NASPE/NCATE beginning teacher standards. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77(2), 15-19, 31-32

Dyson, B. (2006). NASPE/NCATE report preparation for the accreditation process. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77(2), 13-14.

Lund. J. (2006). Creating rubrics for NCATE reports. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77(3), 13-17, 31.

Martin, R. J., & Judd, M. (2006). The NASPE/NCATE program report from the reviewers’ lens. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77(3), 25-31.

REFERENCES National Council on the Accreditation of Teacher

Education (n.d.) Institutions. Retrieved January, 31, 2009 from http://www.ncate.org/subhomepage.asp?audience=institutions

National Council on the Accreditation of Teacher Education (n.d.) Program Reviewers. Retrieved January, 31, 2009 from http://www.ncate.org/subhomepage.asp?audience=program%20review

Senne, T. A. (2006). Program report process and practical suggestions. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 77(3), 18-24, 31.

FEAR NOT

This is not mission impossible. Prepare in advance and pay attention to the details and your program will achieve accreditation!!!

Q U E S T I O N S

MATERIALS/CONTACT INFO

For all materials used in today’s presentation, visit: Http://thenewpe.com/ (click conference

presentations)

Contact info: Matthew Cummiskey [email protected] (860) 832 - 2123